Cenk, the Turkish Barbarian, is a sexist | 24 comments (24 topical, 0 hidden)
It all depends on intent. (none / 0)

It's not sexism for a man to express sexual desire for a woman. Men are programmed by genetics to feel desire for female physical characteristics. To express these feelings is genuine and healthy and never be condemned as "objectification" or "immature" whatever way you want to demonize it.

Condemning men for expressing their genuine sexual feelings only leads to repression which just makes matters worse.

It depends on intent. If there is no intent to cause harm, it should just be considered a compliment. There may be times when it is socially awkward or inappropriate, but this is not sexism. If there is intent to put down women then that's sexism. Cenk often has politically incorrect opinions but always gives reasons for those opinions. I've never heard Cenk say anything that could be considered intent to put down women. You don't have to like it or agree.

by mr science on 03/10/2010 04:59:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Back to Websters again (none / 0)
IF you use your made up definition that one requires an "intent to cause harm" for it to be considered sexist, then you would be right.

I however chose to use the definition Webster uses and the ones the one that practically every dictionary parrots.

Sexism:
1 : prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex

Prejudice:
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights; especially : detriment to one's legal rights or claims
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics

discrimination:
1 a : the act of discriminating b : the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
2 : the quality or power of finely distinguishing
3 a : the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually b : prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment

Nowhere is "intent" mentioned in any of these definitions. A murderer is not  a murderer because they intend to kill another person, its because the committed the act of murder. A liar is not a liar because they intend to deceive, its because they commit the act of lying. People today take far too much liberty in redefining words and facts, if we cant see eye to eye on the definition of the word sexism, then we will just have to agree to disagree.

by Smokin on 03/10/2010 05:17:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
intent (none / 0)

We do in fact gauge murder by intent. First degree, second degree, third degree, manslaughter, involuntary manslaughter. Intent plays a role in determining how we punish these crimes. The act of lying certainly is intentional deception.

First, discrimination isn't inherently bad. It could be just a matter of preference. It's only bad when it involves a "prejudiced or prejudicial outlook".

"some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights"

"preconceived judgment or opinion"

"an irrational attitude of hostility"

These statements from the prejudice definitions imply intent. I don't see how the definitions for prejudice cover Cenk or things he says. As far as I can tell, prejudice is intentional when it actively puts someone down based on race, gender, religion, etc...

The first definition for sexism implies intent. As for the second, I would extend it to mean when the social roles being promoted based on sex treat women as second class citizens or puts them down in some way. Again, this definition doesn't apply to Cenk.

We need to acknowledge that men and women are different in a lot of ways. Neither one is better than the other. Pointing out the differences isn't inherently harmful.

We all have unconscious biases. But when we act on those biases to put others down based on group association, it's hard for me to see how intent to harm is not involved.

by mr science on 03/10/2010 06:03:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Absurd logic (none / 0)
We do not "gauge murder by intent", our legal system assigns different levels of punishment which is influenced greatly by intent. The act of murder is still an all of nothing act, it either happened or it didnt.

"First, discrimination isn't inherently bad."

To have that argument, we would first have to acknowledge that there was discrimination, but so far you dispute that by saying there must be intent in order to discriminate.

Intent:
1 a : the act or fact of intending : purpose; especially : the design or purpose to commit a wrongful or criminal act <admitted wounding him with intent> b : the state of mind with which an act is done : volition
2 : a usually clearly formulated or planned intention : aim <the director's intent>

To use murder as an example, if someone runs over someone because they were drunk and killed that person, the lack of intent to kill does not make that person any less of murderer.

As for the "implied intent" being included in Webster's definition, its frankly utterly absurd. One does not need to intend to discriminate for the act to be committed. For example, in a recent study they found that children are more likely to point to a black man than a white man when asked who they should be more afraid of, these children don't intend to discriminate based on race, but its a form of discrimination nonetheless.  

by Smokin on 03/10/2010 06:18:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
oh brother... (none / 0)

Man, this is getting really tedious. Why do I let myself get dragged into these arguments. Heaven help me. It always boils down to language doesn't it. It's the easiest way to stand your ground and keep arguing until the other tires out. Well, you win. I'm exhausted. I stand by everything I said.

ciao

by mr science on 03/10/2010 06:29:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No (none / 0)
its only tedious when one has to remind someone to use the proper definition of a word rather than to make something up to fit their absurd logic. Im glad you can stand by your point, but my only point it your point has nothing to back it up. In a nut shell, weak sauce.

weak:
1 : lacking strength: as a : deficient in physical vigor : feeble, debilitated b : not able to sustain or exert much weight, pressure, or strain c : not able to resist external force or withstand attack d : easily upset or nauseated "a weak stomach"
2 a : mentally or intellectually deficient b : not firmly decided : vacillating c : resulting from or indicating lack of judgment or discernment d : not able to withstand temptation or persuasion "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak"

sauce
1 : a condiment or relish for food; especially : a fluid dressing or topping
2 : something that adds zest or piquancy
3 : stewed fruit eaten with other food or as a dessert
4 : pert or impudent language or actions

by Smokin on 03/10/2010 06:38:53 PM EST

[ Parent ]
wha????? (none / 0)
"I've never heard Cenk say anything that could be considered intent to put women down?"

How about the fact that the woman who just won the Oscar didn't deserve to win and just got the Oscar because they needed a "token" woman.

That's insulting.  Furthermore, I don't think Cenk intended it to be insulting, but it still is.

Consider this, a woman works really hard to get a promotion. After she gets that promotion her co-worker says "she just got that job because she is a woman". While this person may truly believe that is the case, it's still insulting to the woman who worked hard and actually deserved the job.

If Cenk didn't like the Hurt Locker, he could just have said, "I don't agree".  However, he didn't just leave it at that... he had to write an entire blog about how she's a woman and that's why she got the Oscar.  I get that Cenk really believes in his mind that she didn't deserve the award and this is the most logical explanation... However, again, I ask you... If the director of Precious would have won the Oscar do you really think Cenk wouldn't have caught a boatload of shit if he wrote a blog titled "Did Lee Daniels win the Oscar because he's Black?"

Do you really a) think Cenk would have dared to write that blog even though we know he didn't think Precious deserved the award? b) Cenk wouldn't have been called a racist if he did? c) You'd be defending him right now?

You have to answer "no" to all those questions except maybe the last one because it seems you'd defend any stupid comment he makes.

by ilovecenk99 on 03/10/2010 05:55:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Oscar politics (none / 0)

I've seen how these things get political and gender politics may have swayed peoples vote in this case. To point that out is to state the obvious.

Cenk never said women don't deserve to win Best Directing Oscars. That would be sexist. He just said that gender politics being what they are is why Katherine Bigelow won and gave his reasons. He said that it is just his opinion and he may be wrong. I think its a valid opinion.

If the same case applied to a black person and Cenk thought racial politics played a role and gave good reasons for thinking so, yes I'd defend him. When sanctimonious leebrals like you pass judgement and throw the charge of racism at people unjustly, you bet I would defend him.

by mr science on 03/10/2010 06:17:58 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Uhhhh.... sure, it was all gender politics... (none / 0)
there's no way a woman could have actually "earned" an Oscar for best director.  I see your point...  

The Tarantino's and Cameron's of the world just have to sit back and take it.. because if they speak up then those stupid sanctimonious liberals will scream about it.  Thank God they've got Cenk to speak up for them now.  I mean, those poor guys were robbed by the director with the vagina... Robbed, I tell you!!!!!

Most of the people promoted in corporate America these days, that's all racial and gender politics as well... You know, affirmative action and shit. They don't actually deserve it, but what can you do about it???

I'm going to take off my shoes and get back to the kitchen now, where I belong....

by ilovecenk99 on 03/10/2010 07:16:18 PM EST

[ Parent ]
congratulations (none / 0)
You have completely misconstrued EVERYTHING I wrote. I will only say to you: come back when you have calmed down and reread my post when you can think more clearly. Anything else I can say will just get twisted into something grotesque... if its not already happening...

by mr science on 03/10/2010 07:25:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]

Cenk, the Turkish Barbarian, is a sexist | 24 comments (24 topical, 0 hidden)